RE: "Tojo Edition" (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition



Message

Nemo121 -> RE: "Tojo Edition" (12/10/2009 8:47:39 PM)

Terminus,

quote:

We've been accused of all sorts of falsehoods and lies


Not by me. And accusing you guys of lies etc isn't right either. BOTH groups should stick to debating the facts or, at least, trying to clarify the facts.


quote:

even though we've told the truth again and again and again, it's without effect. 


Aye but doesn't that point up the need for a systemic solution in which there are certain clear rules for posters as to what will and won't get them a response. If they follow the rules then they'll get a polite, appropriate response. If they don't they won't. At present there's a fairly good chance a valid query from someone who posts in good faith will get a snappy reply from developers who are probably fried from people getting abusive in PMs etc. It is human but it is also bad policy.

It ends up shooting the wrong guy and turning potential allies into people who are, at best, indifferent.

E.g.
Air, Naval, Land and Economic topics could each have a couple of nominated devs who will try to answer questions on those topics but ONLY if they are posted in the appropriate threads/sub-forum.

If you don't post in the right sub-forum then you can't expect an answer. If you ask something they don't have time to work on you'll get a "We don't have time to do that research now but if you do it we'll look at your findings." Devs who like poking fun at people with questions would undertake to stay out of those subforums unless they're being constructive.

If someone posts in those sub-forums and isn't constructive then it'll be much clearer that they aren't being constructive and, over time, a self-policing policy will develop ( it is human nature ).

Benefits: It provides clear rules for posters. It guarantees a constructive answer ( even if it is only - "No, we don't have time to do x or y " ) from developers. It gives developers the freedom to ignore any posts made in other forums or via PM as those posts "Don't follow the policy for obtaining feedback/a response."

In short it should save developers and posters a lot of time and frustration. The current chaotic system does, I think, foster frustration on both sides which isn't healthy for the game ( or people involved ).



Andy Mac -> RE: "Tojo Edition" (12/10/2009 9:02:24 PM)

Actually thats whats supposed to happen - I constantly tell folks the only thread I am guaranteed to review is the land sticky thread.

I think the others are the same

I make a point of checking the land thread and tech support forum every day apart from that I review others when I can and answer queries in other threads when I have the time




Terminus -> RE: "Tojo Edition" (12/10/2009 9:28:31 PM)

And people have also been told countless times that if they've got problems and issues they'd like to see solved, they must open a thread in the Tech Support forum and attach a savegame to expect support. Do they do it? No. Are we considered jerks if we don't respond to threads in the main forum? Youbetcha.

I personally think there's a certain amount of jealousy involved, at least on the part of some of the whiners. The whole dev team was lifted from the forum, and there's obviously a number of forum posters who suffer from It-Shoulda-Been-Me-itis.



Erik Rutins -> RE: "Tojo Edition" (12/10/2009 9:41:50 PM)

Allright, I think that there is entirely too much jumping to conclusions and making assumptions going on around here. Everyone, please step back, take a deep breath, now shake hands and let's start over.

Here's are the discussion points for this thread:

1. The development team did not deliberately balance the game towards the Allied or Japanese sides, but rather strove to make objective history their guide in both design and statistics.

2. Some folks are convinced otherwise. I wish we could convince them they are wrong.

3. That doesn't take away from the fact that there are some issues that have been and are being addressed that caused some balance problems in the initial release. However, some of these issues were also exaggerated and people often discard issues that contradict their perceived balance bias in the game when making their argument that it is skewed one way or another.

4. We're interested to hear how the new update is working for everyone and how many of those issues it has in fact resolved.



crsutton -> RE: "Tojo Edition" (12/10/2009 10:21:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Allright, I think that there is entirely too much jumping to conclusions and making assumptions going on around here. Everyone, please step back, take a deep breath, now shake hands and let's start over.

Here's are the discussion points for this thread:

1. The development team did not deliberately balance the game towards the Allied or Japanese sides, but rather strove to make objective history their guide in both design and statistics.

2. Some folks are convinced otherwise. I wish we could convince them they are wrong.

3. That doesn't take away from the fact that there are some issues that have been and are being addressed that caused some balance problems in the initial release. However, some of these issues were also exaggerated and people often discard issues that contradict their perceived balance bias in the game when making their argument that it is skewed one way or another.

4. We're interested to hear how the new update is working for everyone and how many of those issues it has in fact resolved.


1. I doubt it. How many pbem games are out of the first year-much less the first five months? Way too early to tell.

2. I doubt you can change his mind. It is just human nature to form an opinion based on personal experience. After all, my life (game) is much more improtant than anybody else's. If I get jumped by KB and busted up, then you can bet I going be bitching about balance. I just can't help myself.

3. I have been more than vocal in stating my opinions and suggestions. It seems like they are being worked on. I have never seen a better company at supporting a game. ( I mean that.) A ambitious project of this size will always require numerous patches and refinements. You guys seem to be at least hearing our gripes.

4. As the Allied player, I made the mistake of granting my "too good" opponent a go at scen. #2 and I am getting pimp slapped like a two dollah ho. So, it is hard for me to evaluate. China seems much better post patch but it may be too late for me. However, I got a long way to play. I still have all my carriers, and as long as I have all of them, I am still in the poker game. Otherwise, it is too eary to start griping about he patch..[;)] Don't worry, you will hear from me.

I could tell from his post that the guy was frustrated. Some of the issues he brough up are legit and some have already been addressed. Give him a break. As for balance, ask me again this time next year.

As for the game. We maybe I am going to go down in flames due to it being an unbalanced pig. However, I doubt that. And if it is and I do, it is going to be one hell of a ride. [&o]



khyberbill -> RE: "Tojo Edition" (12/10/2009 10:22:51 PM)

quote:

The starting presumption then as now is these units are RESTRICTED we said pre releasem, during release, pre patch 1, post patch 1 and I am saying it again now.


Andy, I think your posts are some of the best. Always direct and informative. When I surf the forum I always try to read yours because I know I will learn something new. That being said, my opponent bought out all the artillery from Manchuria with PP, moved all the tubes to Changsha and started blasting away. 10,000+ casualties a turn was the norm.

A dev asked to see the game turn and Don, my opponent, sent it to him and the dev told us it was WAD. What surprised Don, was that 1) lvl 4 forts were made out of tissue paper, 2) how easy it was to supply his death star. Is it gamey to buy out all the artillery from the Kwangtung Army and mass it in one spot? Your post indicates it is not, as long as the PP's are paid. Before Patch 1 and Patch 2 there was lots of discussion about China on this forum. Canoerebel's AAR today indicated that it is still a slaughterhouse. The effectiveness of massed artillery is frightening. Don also blasted me in Burma with a mini-death star. We made it to 10/42 and are now going to re-start with Patch 2 and HR.

AE is a great game. I just wish I didn't have to consider an HR or HRs for China when I don't think any are required elsewhere. The fact is, if you tell someone that he can remove over 5000 AV from Manchuko after paying the PPs and the Russians are going to sit and drink vodka in their barracks, then a normal person is going to do it. The Japanese really doesn't have a need to spend the PPs other wise.

I am going to continue to play the game. I really like it. For an old fart, it keeps the brain active. I am just going to have some China and artillery HR. And please keep up the good work!



dorjun driver -> RE: "Tojo Edition" (12/10/2009 10:44:37 PM)

People! People! It's simply that time of year! It doesn't really matter your race, religion, country of origin, sexual proclivities, &c, &c, &c. Let us just get along.

At least through Donkey Day, then you can all p*ss off![:)]



Andy Mac -> RE: "Tojo Edition" (12/10/2009 11:29:28 PM)

nm



pmelheck1 -> RE: "Tojo Edition" (12/10/2009 11:56:39 PM)

I've pointed out several times issues with I feel exist with the AI.  I do not feel any type of bias toward Japan as I feel the AI in order to give a better game has gone from hidden cheat to in some cases blatent cheat.  I feel the AE team did a fantastic job and if you don't bring up issues they can't be addressed one way or the other.  As someone who has programmed I understand limitations on code and Artificial stupidity.  I did bring up issues because if you never ask it can't get better.  Sometimes folks seem to get a bit irate with items I bring up but I don't take anything personal from anyone they are stating their option which to me is a good thing. 

I still give kudos to the AE team for their hard and outstanding work.   Please don't let the critisism get to you.  I for one am very passionate about AE as it seems many others are.  Personally I would take great pride in creating someing that can create such passion.

T - I don't think the team approached AE every day with the thought "how can we hose the players" .  I do like the way it seems you look at the boards some times.  [:D][:D][:)][:)]



HansBolter -> RE: "Tojo Edition" (12/11/2009 12:01:57 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

I personally think there's a certain amount of jealousy involved, at least on the part of some of the whiners. The whole dev team was lifted from the forum, and there's obviously a number of forum posters who suffer from It-Shoulda-Been-Me-itis.



Perhaps nearly as many as the All-Too-Full-Of-Themselves-Itis sufferers who did get "lifted"!

That's a door that swings both ways and I'm happy to play the devil's advocate by reminding that it does.



jazman -> RE: "Tojo Edition" (12/11/2009 12:31:06 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter


2. Wargame developers would never, never survive the brutal design crits of an architecture school. One of the reasons I am as hard and blunt with criticism as I am is because I did survive those brutal design crits in architecture school. Criticism is a GOOD thing folks, it spurs us to improve. Too many devs and playtesters have not learned how to take criticism of their work without perceiving it as criticism of themselves.


Congratulations. Now welcome back to the wargaming world.



stuman -> RE: "Tojo Edition" (12/11/2009 12:36:15 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

Let me state up front that I do not agree with the guy no matter what some of you may think.

I am concerned about two things.


1. No one seems to have answered his single greatest criticism, that almost the entire air force can be pulled without detriment.

2. Wargame developers would never, never survive the brutal design crits of an architecture school. One of the reasons I am as hard and blunt with criticism as I am is because I did survive those brutal design crits in architecture school. Criticism is a GOOD thing folks, it spurs us to improve. Too many devs and playtesters have not learned how to take criticism of their work without perceiving it as criticism of themselves.


To that point, there is a detriment, you have to pay PPs. I like the fact that the Jap. player has some flexibilty if he so desires. The very easy fix in a PBEM, if needed, is to agree that no units, or just a few, etc., can only be pulled out. It is not a complicated issue imo.

Maybe I am just easier to please, but I expect a game this massively complex to require a few HRs to suit individual players tastes.



Fletcher -> RE: "Tojo Edition" (12/11/2009 12:46:07 AM)

My support to AE Team for the hard work. AE is an amazing product. Like a grogrand playing wargames from I was 14 y.o. I am absolutely satisfied with AE like the best PC wargame that I ever played.
About criticism, I am not agree with comments like wargamer forum... Probably this player donīt know about House Rules (needed sometimes to play as near to historical envrioment as possible). If you are agree with your opponent no one IJA aircraft will be transfer from Kwangtung to another playing areas... right?.
Like this H.R. another more could be taken for players to avoid unrealistic situations (no strategic bombing on China factories, 4E bombers at 10,000 or 15,000 feet in naval attack, all PT boats in the same hex in the same TF, and like this all that you want or need...).
For the other hands I can not understand this kind of players that need that the game will be like real war was.. WITP AE like others wargames is a game, itīs not the real life.. Could be near as possible to real life, but itīs a game.. and will be boring if I like JFB must to take the same deccisions of IJA/IJN Staff or like AFB taking the same decisions like Nimits/McArthur/Chiangk...wouldnīt be ?.. I think this "wargamers" like the historical timeline...well, you can take the same decisions like japanese Staff, but thatīs your deccision in your play, no more.
The game is for all wargamers (no only for purist), and I think more of them like "What if.."

Finally, I am an unconditional WITP AE player (like AFB or JFB, I am glad playing any of sides) and I am very glad with the AE Team work.

P.S: excuse me for my english, itīs not my native language, i wait could be understood.

Ramón



timtom -> RE: "Tojo Edition" (12/11/2009 12:50:58 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

1. No one seems to have answered his single greatest criticism, that almost the entire air force can be pulled without detriment.



It's worth noting that to the IJAAF, Manchuria was a major, if not the main, location for forming and working up operational units prior to overseas deployment.

Come August '45, the IJAAF's first line strength in Manchuria proper was just three units - 104th Hiko Sentai, 25th Dokuritsu Hiko Chutai and 81st Dokuritsu Hiko Chutai. Also present was the Imperial Manchuarian Air Force's three Hikotai's of apparently little combat value. The 22nd, 25th, and 85th Hiko Sentai's plus IJNAF Hikotai S-304 were located in Korea and the 3rd Chutai/54th Hiko Sentai along with a detachment of IJNAF 203 Kokutai were located in the Kuriles.

I wouldn't know how to construct an argument for forcibly keeping air units in Manchuria, or, if there were to be a garrison level of some kind, it would have to be so low to render it a poor return on coder's time - if history serves as any kind of benchmark.

The problem we do have ATM is, as noted on the forum, that you can buy out 2 AD and get all the air units for free in the bargain. We did consider just making 2 AD permanently restricted, but a) historically 2 AD deployed to the Phillippines and b) the issue is wider than just 2 AD and rather than slab on a bandage, we thought it better to look at the root of the problem, which however is a bit more involved from a coding viewpoint (and there's a queu, too). I suppose a suggestion that players show some restraint when faced with obvious loopholes would have all the aerodynamic qualities of a lead baloon [;)].

I'm not quite exactly sure what is meant by the comment that "As far as pilot training the Japanese pilots train at the same rate American pilots do. So much for keeping it real". If what is referred to is trainee pilot XP levels, then a) American pilots do improve v the Japanese with time and b) I would posit that the evidence, such as it is, suggests that there weren't much to separate the basic flight training provided Japanese and Allied pilots.



romanovich -> RE: "Tojo Edition" (12/11/2009 12:53:48 AM)

Erik,

I take a philosophical stand: I like that the game is relatively open - and it's an important reason I purchased it, am fascinated by it, and recommended it to friends. I can do with the game as I please - either as Jap or Allied. As Jap, it's cool to have the option to redeploy the Kwangtung Army and/or its planes. If I play a PBEM, I expect that that freedom will be curtailed by HRs so as to balance the starting set-up according to the needs of both parties playing. But if I play the AI, I like my freedom to play as I choose (either as Jap or Allied).

People like the fellow who tried to apply pressure by blackmailing your product on the other forum are essentially bigots. Because in their worldview the Allies should never loose, they try to force all other players/purchasers of the game (including the Jap players) to have to stay within certain parameters of gameplay they consider acceptable. That curtails my freedom of choice within your excellent game, obviously.

Whatever you do, I implore you not to hardcode anything that would limit the scope and freedoms of this game. Don't listen to the intolerant. If they consider the game to be a Fanboi or Allied Edition, their problem, you gave them tons of ways to play around that (the editor, difficulty levels in the AI, HR in PBEMs). That's not really what they are after! Instead, they want to prescribe how others have to play this game. Don't relent! Leave me my Kwangtung Army! ;)

Thanks!



Terminus -> RE: "Tojo Edition" (12/11/2009 1:05:11 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter


quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

I personally think there's a certain amount of jealousy involved, at least on the part of some of the whiners. The whole dev team was lifted from the forum, and there's obviously a number of forum posters who suffer from It-Shoulda-Been-Me-itis.



Perhaps nearly as many as the All-Too-Full-Of-Themselves-Itis sufferers who did get "lifted"!

That's a door that swings both ways and I'm happy to play the devil's advocate by reminding that it does.


Thank you for proving my point.



Lrfss -> RE: "Tojo Edition" (12/11/2009 1:08:56 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Fletcher

My support to AE Team for the hard work. AE is an amazing product. Like a grogrand playing wargames from I was 14 y.o. I am absolutely satisfied with AE like the best PC wargame that I ever played.
About criticism, I am not agree with comments like wargamer forum... Probably this player donīt know about House Rules (needed sometimes to play as near to historical envrioment as possible). If you are agree with your opponent no one IJA aircraft will be transfer from Kwangtung to another playing areas... right?. For the other hands I can not understand this kind of players that need that the game will be like real war was.. WITP AE like others wargames is a game, itīs not the real life.. Could be near as possible to real life, but itīs a game.. and will be boring if I like JFB must to take the same deccisions of IJA/IJN Staff or like AFB taking the same decisions like Nimits/McArthur/Chiangk...wouldnīt be ?.. I think this "wargamers" like the historical timeline...well, you can take the same decisions like japanese Staff, but thatīs your deccision in your play, no more.

Finally, I am an unconditional WITP AE player (like AFB or JFB, I am glad playing any of sides) and I am very glad with the AE Team work.

P.S: excuse me for my english, itīs not my native language, i wait could be understood.

Ramón


I speak perfect English...lol I like what "Fletcher" said above and it pretty much covers it... I have 35 years in wargaming and WITP-AE is unmatched though I hope that someone/company will try and compete/exceed and do so...lol! Yeah right, I think that maybe the only thing that comes close is another "Matrix" game "BOB-BTR v2 Combo" just released in so far as PC games go? In so far as board games that come close... Has anyone ever compared/excelled beyond SL-ASL dynasty as a whole? Cut my death on the originals through the last of ASL that I knew of about a zillion years ago!

Keep up the great work! And as always many thanks from the Hardcore and sometimes somewhat Hidden Fan Club!

Sincerely,

Lrfss

PS:

Can we have "Trainers" back and additionally put in "Night Skills-Specific"? lol!



stuman -> RE: "Tojo Edition" (12/11/2009 1:36:29 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Fletcher

My support to AE Team for the hard work. AE is an amazing product. Like a grogrand playing wargames from I was 14 y.o. I am absolutely satisfied with AE like the best PC wargame that I ever played.
About criticism, I am not agree with comments like wargamer forum... Probably this player donīt know about House Rules (needed sometimes to play as near to historical envrioment as possible). If you are agree with your opponent no one IJA aircraft will be transfer from Kwangtung to another playing areas... right?.
Like this H.R. another more could be taken for players to avoid unrealistic situations (no strategic bombing on China factories, 4E bombers at 10,000 or 15,000 feet in naval attack, all PT boats in the same hex in the same TF, and like this all that you want or need...).
For the other hands I can not understand this kind of players that need that the game will be like real war was.. WITP AE like others wargames is a game, itīs not the real life.. Could be near as possible to real life, but itīs a game.. and will be boring if I like JFB must to take the same deccisions of IJA/IJN Staff or like AFB taking the same decisions like Nimits/McArthur/Chiangk...wouldnīt be ?.. I think this "wargamers" like the historical timeline...well, you can take the same decisions like japanese Staff, but thatīs your deccision in your play, no more.
The game is for all wargamers (no only for purist), and I think more of them like "What if.."

Finally, I am an unconditional WITP AE player (like AFB or JFB, I am glad playing any of sides) and I am very glad with the AE Team work.

P.S: excuse me for my english, itīs not my native language, i wait could be understood.

Ramón


I agree with you.
And your English is better than my Spanish ( even though I took four semesters of it in college ! ).



Mynok -> RE: "Tojo Edition" (12/11/2009 1:54:58 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mullk

I've pointed out several times issues with I feel exist with the AI.  I do not feel any type of bias toward Japan as I feel the AI in order to give a better game has gone from hidden cheat to in some cases blatent cheat.  I feel the AE team did a fantastic job and if you don't bring up issues they can't be addressed one way or the other.  As someone who has programmed I understand limitations on code and Artificial stupidity.  I did bring up issues because if you never ask it can't get better.  Sometimes folks seem to get a bit irate with items I bring up but I don't take anything personal from anyone they are stating their option which to me is a good thing. 

I still give kudos to the AE team for their hard and outstanding work.   Please don't let the critisism get to you.  I for one am very passionate about AE as it seems many others are.  Personally I would take great pride in creating someing that can create such passion.

T - I don't think the team approached AE every day with the thought "how can we hose the players" .  I do like the way it seems you look at the boards some times.  [:D][:D][:)][:)]



Good post. The passion for the game does lend itself to taking things too personally sometimes, and I certainly would admit to having done so.

Those of us who have know the devs for many years now understand their motives and thinking at least a bit better than the newbies. When their motives are insulted, it is natural to try to rebut them.



RevRick -> RE: "Tojo Edition" (12/11/2009 2:43:26 AM)

Gentlemen, we have been together far too long and through far too many discussions to allow ourselves to devolve into the wrangling and fanny-snapping we have going on even in this thread.  So, hold off on the snide remarks if at all possible.  And I know I have not been lily white - I am still trying to figure out what happened to the IJN Subs (and I don't like it!)  But, we owe it to each other, and ourselves, to maintain the standard of civility that has been present on almost all Matrix Forums on which I have been present (save one - and it wasn't this one.)  I also know it's not easy.  But, it is possible.  What I fear is that even though Erik asked us to take a breath, we have not heard it.  For most of the time I have been on this board, and it's predecessors, we have been at least, civil, and most of the time courteous and helpful with each other EVEN in disagreements.  There have always been a few who have bucked the trend, but not enough to start a ruckus of any huge amount.  But, I have recently noticed that what we have been hissing and spitting at each other about has led us to have little better demeanor than a bunch of 8th grade boys when the best looking girl in the school walked into my classroom with the 'girls' at high port, jiggling, and guilty of vagrancy (no visible means of support!)  It only took me half an hour to get their attention again. 

As far as the games goes - it ain't perfect.  Well, wow.  Big Whoopdeedoo!  Take a look a the rest of the world.  But, it is the best representation of the game I have wanted since 1974 - and since I bought Witp 0.0, in the big box.   But none of us on any side of this issue are making any points by being snide, rude, of just plain nasty.  Let's cut it out and stop sounding like the United States Congress...  EGAD!!!! 





dorjun driver -> RE: "Tojo Edition" (12/11/2009 3:35:29 AM)

[sm=00000924.gif]What the Rev says.



bradfordkay -> RE: "Tojo Edition" (12/11/2009 5:45:36 AM)

Don, I just want to thank you for all the time and effort you have put in to this monstrous addiction we call WITP-AE. There are a lot of us here that are very appreciative of your work. 



Fletcher -> RE: "Tojo Edition" (12/11/2009 10:22:36 AM)

quote:

I agree with you.
And your English is better than my Spanish ( even though I took four semesters of it in college !

_____________________________

" Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room. " President Muffley [quote/]

Thankyou stuman !... Your sign is a comment from "Dr.Strangelove or how to learn to love the bomb" ? [:D]



DivePac88 -> RE: "Tojo Edition" (12/11/2009 11:48:07 AM)

I fear a lot of this criticism comes from people not fully upstanding, or taking the time to get a good grounding in the mechanics of this game. AE is not the game for every wargamer, it is a very complex game to play, and learn to play. It is a big operational level game, representing a big theater of World War Two military operations. Above all I think that it punishes bad generalship, and does this realistically, the hard way.

Take for example China; you ask why the Japanese player takes the major Cities there easily? The answer is ‘will’, and the ability to transfer airpower and ground units from the north. The Japanese player is making strategic decisions to transfer units from Manchuria, to affect the outcome in China. That this was impossible politically for the Japanese to do historically does not mean that should be impossible for the Japanese player to do in AE.

The Japanese had no will to take large parts of China, or to control large parts of the Chinese population. Any Japanese player in AE will tell you; that for every City they take China, they have to leave a large garrison to hold it. The same token applies in the Pacific, but for different reasons; garrisons to keep Allied counter attack out. The Japanese player might be able to sweep all before him in the first few months of the war. But he has one eye on the calendar, because he knows the Allied player is growing stronger, and that he is coming back.

[;)]



bklooste -> RE: "Tojo Edition" (12/11/2009 12:08:10 PM)

Obviously the developers were not biased ( ie the Yamato introduction etc), the bombardment in China is very pro US not Japan as the US has a lot more tubes.

Personally i feel the bias is slightly against Japan....and considering knowlege favours the attacker Japan should be ahead in 41-42 and behind in 45-45.

One major issue is with the AI i really suggest putting back the original AI scripts ( which has a more historoic ie cautious Japan though less challenging) . Not that i would play it buit it would get the AFB who enjoy stomping on the Japanese and slowing them down worse than historical a warm and fuzzy fealing.

Not sure where the AFB get the ideas the IJA was a push over , with air support and well supplied they pushed over the Australians in Malaysia ( who did quite well in North Africa against Rommel who in turn gave the US a run for their money) , they also did ok in teh Solomans with pretty bad supplies also with Ichi Go they thrashed China.. Its just historically they chose not to.



Jim D Burns -> RE: "Tojo Edition" (12/11/2009 12:30:58 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: timtom
I suppose a suggestion that players show some restraint when faced with obvious loopholes would have all the aerodynamic qualities of a lead baloon [;)].


Why not simply make the majority of the Manchu garrison permanently fixed and bring in the historical withdrawals as reinforcing units assigned to the HQs they historically transferred to? After all the allies are hamstrung with severe historical limitations, why not give one to Japan to fix such a drastic exploit?

Jim



FatR -> RE: "Tojo Edition" (12/11/2009 12:47:05 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

http://www.wargamer.com/forums/tm.aspx?&m=391563&mpage=1

Well, opinions vary and I've seen much the same discussion here. For the record, I disagree. I was part of the development team and I know that there was absolutely no attempt to balance this in favor of the Japanese. I'm posting this here in the hopes that some of you who have played WITP AE can post _civil, polite_ responses to the original poster to try to convince him to take a second look. Please do not look at this as any kind of call to arms, I'd just like him to hear from more WITP players with whatever your opinion may be, since he doesn't seem to want to post here. I respect that he had a negative experience, but I think he's jumped to the wrong conclusion here.

Regards,

- Erik

So... people who got beaten in PBEM complain about the bad game designers, that actually allow Japanese to take better decision that decisions taken in RL and don't burden Japan with even more arbitrarily restrictions on Kwantung Army (never mind, that going with history, the chance of Soviet activation before autumn of 1944 at the earliest should pretty much be 0% no matter what). Somehow, I fail to sympathize with this viewpoint.

Also, despite many complaints about "broken China", current AARs clearly show, that even before the patch 2 and with using most of your PPs to free units for China, achieving a total victory in China against a human opponent before Japanese offensive phase is well and truly over is impossible. The best results you can actually see is clearing central plains and south by late summer of 1942, by which point Japanese troops tend to be low on supply. So, even if a total victory is possible, it's not going to materialize until early 1943, and by this point India should be too well fortified. And elsewhere extra infantry won't help that much anyway.

Returning to complaint about moving units from Manchukuo earlier than historically (as Kwantung army was stripped of most of its good units anyway), the game does not make everything on Philippines surrender with fall of Bataan, neither it forces the capitulation of Singapore after successful crossing, even if Japanese have inferior AV, neither it forces the surrender of Java without much land battle, and so on. So neither it should forbid Japanese from choosing a better strategy. As about the advantage provided by player's foreknowledge, the restrictions already in place should be enough to compensate for it.



Shark7 -> RE: "Tojo Edition" (12/11/2009 3:41:13 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: timtom

quote:

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

1. No one seems to have answered his single greatest criticism, that almost the entire air force can be pulled without detriment.



It's worth noting that to the IJAAF, Manchuria was a major, if not the main, location for forming and working up operational units prior to overseas deployment.

Come August '45, the IJAAF's first line strength in Manchuria proper was just three units - 104th Hiko Sentai, 25th Dokuritsu Hiko Chutai and 81st Dokuritsu Hiko Chutai. Also present was the Imperial Manchuarian Air Force's three Hikotai's of apparently little combat value. The 22nd, 25th, and 85th Hiko Sentai's plus IJNAF Hikotai S-304 were located in Korea and the 3rd Chutai/54th Hiko Sentai along with a detachment of IJNAF 203 Kokutai were located in the Kuriles.

I wouldn't know how to construct an argument for forcibly keeping air units in Manchuria, or, if there were to be a garrison level of some kind, it would have to be so low to render it a poor return on coder's time - if history serves as any kind of benchmark.

The problem we do have ATM is, as noted on the forum, that you can buy out 2 AD and get all the air units for free in the bargain. We did consider just making 2 AD permanently restricted, but a) historically 2 AD deployed to the Phillippines and b) the issue is wider than just 2 AD and rather than slab on a bandage, we thought it better to look at the root of the problem, which however is a bit more involved from a coding viewpoint (and there's a queu, too). I suppose a suggestion that players show some restraint when faced with obvious loopholes would have all the aerodynamic qualities of a lead baloon [;)].

I'm not quite exactly sure what is meant by the comment that "As far as pilot training the Japanese pilots train at the same rate American pilots do. So much for keeping it real". If what is referred to is trainee pilot XP levels, then a) American pilots do improve v the Japanese with time and b) I would posit that the evidence, such as it is, suggests that there weren't much to separate the basic flight training provided Japanese and Allied pilots.



Timtom, seems to me that only those 6 units you mentioned should be permanently restricted. The rest should be open for movement.

As far as the pilot training, the actual skill levels were about equal, it was the NUMBERS of pilots that could be trained that were the difference. The US could put more pilots out in the same amount of time, which I think is properly represented in the game. It was only at the very end of the war that Japan was sending out poorly trained pilots as Kamikaze due to pure desperation.



KenchiSulla -> RE: "Tojo Edition" (12/11/2009 4:34:48 PM)

Although he has a point about the Kwantung army there is a very simple remedy.... house rules...

We are all grown ups here, aren't we.... [:D]



Shark7 -> RE: "Tojo Edition" (12/11/2009 4:39:41 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cannonfodder

Although he has a point about the Kwantung army there is a very simple remedy.... house rules...

We are all grown ups here, aren't we.... [:D]


Are you certain? [:'(]



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
5.406006